Ju Haralson Posted October 4, 2015 Report Posted October 4, 2015 I have had a WWII NCO sword for many years, but as I go to try to dig up it's history I'm running into some oddities with it. As long as I've had it, I don't think it's a fake, as the quality is on par with another more easily traced NCO sword I have and it's aging seems natural. The Hamon is very light and flat, the tip lack the hard lines, and the Fuchi is brass rather than copper with only 2 marks instead of three. the serial number (which does match the saya) is only 5 digits and lacks a mark with it. I cannot get the brass screw in the aluminum tsuka to loosen as it is too stripped to get any leverage as well as corrosion to inspect the tang, which of course just makes it all the more difficult to track down. The oddities of this one just have me stumped. I would greatly appreciate any information on this sword as possible. I have no intention of ever selling it. I just want to know it's history. Thanks!! Quote
Mark Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 I have seen a lot of NCO swords. I am quite sure it is a fake, sorry 1 Quote
Ju Haralson Posted October 5, 2015 Author Report Posted October 5, 2015 It could be and that would be alright for my purpose, but please elaborate how you came to that conclusion. I'm a bladesmith so I can fix many things, the steel is a carbon of good quality and the differential heat treatment is also decent. So if it is fake it is a good one. Somewhere along the way someone took a file to it which makes it all the harder to determine. Again, please elaborate, I don't mind if it is fake I just want to know what makes you say if it is or isn't. Thank you for your input. 1 Quote
SwordGuyJoe Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 The sloppy bohi told me that it's likely fake. Could be wrong, but I don't think so Quote
jason_mazzy Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 the habaki and stamp shows fake to me Quote
Ju Haralson Posted October 5, 2015 Author Report Posted October 5, 2015 I'm inclined to agree too much doesn't add up. The lack of clarity with the bohi was a concern but I had seen similar in wakashais (from different period though) and the file marks made me question my gut. I'm very interested in more information about the habaki. That was a spot I could not tell a difference. What about it shows variance? Also does anyone recognize the edge side symbol (not the armory one)? Quote
Kai-Gunto Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 The stamps on the fuchi is completly wrong. Its a fake sword. 1 Quote
lonely panet Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 don't forget the manner in which the seppa are finished too. very poor. Quote
Shamsy Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 A better example of a fake than the usual rubbish from China but still reasonably obvious one if you've ever seen a real type 95. In fact, I think you'll find this is a Spanish sword. They do pretty fair replica. Reasons: Kissaki is incorrectly shaped. Paint not period colors or age. The brass is not dulled with appropriate aged patina nor is it still showing any of the brown finish the IJA applied. No arsenal stamp on blade above habaki , which is wrong shape. Blade numbers incorrect font and outside correct range. Saya missing brass throat. Fuchi stamps are not correctly spaced, incorrect size, looks like only 2? and not matching anything known. The stamping is also not at all consistent with those they produced in terms of depth or quality. With better photography I could likely give you many more signs. I'll note there are a few variants out there inconsistent with the usual 95's. Different materials and oddities etc. This however is most definitely not one. Sorry for the bad news! Quote
Brian Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 Ju, Reading your post, I'm not 100% sure if you are aware of the fact that the NCO swords are fully machine made from bar stock, are not differentially hardened, do not have a hamon, and the tsuka is not meant to be removed as the tang is not nicely finished off and is not signed? Moot point of course, as this isn't a real one. Sorry, but hope you will continue with your interests and go on to have lots of real ones in the future. Quote
Johnny Barracuda Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 I concur. Fake. Fantasy stamps and tip of the bohi is juste wrong. Sorry for you. Quote
kusunokimasahige Posted October 5, 2015 Report Posted October 5, 2015 I am sorry to say it is a Chinese fake.Here is an image of a real NCO sword :http://www.antique-swords.eu/Japanese-WW2-NCOs-katana-nagoya-arsenal.html Quote
Ju Haralson Posted October 5, 2015 Author Report Posted October 5, 2015 Thank you shamsy. That was the more in depth and details I was looking for. As I said we do have a verified nco sword, which is why the differences with this one had me confused. The patina being gone is from my own polishing, because as I said its value to me has little to do with its veracity. With it not being of historic significance it frees me to make changes to it. Thanks for the information. Quote
Shamsy Posted October 6, 2015 Report Posted October 6, 2015 No worries at all. I've had the opportunity to see a lot of unique examples and variants of these swords and have a few in my own collection for reference to. These were my first Japanese sword and are of special interest for me, so I enjoyed seeing this Spanish example. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.